role="main" class="main-container container js-quickedit-main-content" id="main-content">

November 4, 2002

37th Parliament, 3rd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2002-Nov-04 vol. A (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L'ONTARIO

Monday 4 November 2002 Lundi 4 novembre 2002

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SUDBURY REGIONAL HOSPITAL

OPTOMETRISTS

PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITALS

BILL FERRIER

MISSISSAUGA ARTS AWARDS

LUNG CANCER AWARENESS MONTH

CLARINGTON GREEN GAELS

HYDRO RATES

HELLENIC CARE FOR SENIORS

VISITORS

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

GRAFFITI AND ADVERTISING SIGNS

CONTROL ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002

SUR LE CONTRÔLE DES GRAFFITIS

ET DES PANNEAUX PUBLICITAIRES

TRANSPARENCY

IN PUBLIC MATTERS ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LA TRANSPARENCE

DES QUESTIONS D'INTÉRÊT PUBLIC

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

VISITORS

ORAL QUESTIONS

HYDRO RATES

ONTARIO DISABILITY

SUPPORT PROGRAM

KYOTO PROTOCOL

HYDRO RATES

NURSE PRACTITIONERS

HYDRO RATES

HOSPITAL FUNDING

RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

DOCTOR SHORTAGE

WORKPLACE SAFETY FOR STUDENTS

HYDRO RATES

PETITIONS

AIR QUALITY

HIGHWAY 69

POST-SECONDARY

EDUCATION FUNDING

HYDRO RATES

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT

POVERTY

LONG-TERM CARE

HIGHWAY 69

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TIME ALLOCATION /

ATTRIBUTION DE TEMPS

Monday 4 November 2002 Lundi 4 novembre 2002

The House met at 1330.

Prayers.

MEMBERS' STATEMENTS

SUDBURY REGIONAL HOSPITAL

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): After several delays that have for months kept the health care providers in our community on edge, the health minister finally has in his possession the operational review of the Sudbury Regional Hospital. For months, while hydro costs have soared and with construction costs rising, the debt-ridden hospital has remained in a state of stalled, partially finished construction because this government has abdicated its responsibility and promise to ensure that our hospital becomes a referral centre for northeastern Ontario.

Right now, the dormant construction site, as the seasons change in the north, has quite frankly become a symbol of how the Harris-Eves government has broken its promises and abandoned health care in our community.

Hospital administrators and staff have put forth a valiant effort, but sheer will alone cannot ensure the hospital can serve patients. Funding is needed; provincial funding is needed. The hospital asked for the operational review, Minister Clement, so that your government can see first-hand that, rather than cutting corners, you must provide the funding necessary to ensure construction reaches completion and that the level of service adequately and safely reflects the needs of northerners.

Today my community demands that you, Minister Clement, release the results of the operational review, that your government ensures the number of beds will not be further reduced, that your government provides the funding that is owing and long overdue so our community can have restored faith in your health services and construction on our hospital can again begin.

OPTOMETRISTS

Mr Rob Sampson (Mississauga Centre): I rise today to recognize an important health care profession in Ontario: optometrists. Optometrists play an important role as primary eye care providers in this province. More than four million patients visit an optometrist annually and, as you can see, I'm one of them. Optometrists not only provide prescriptions for eyeglasses; they routinely diagnose and manage eye-related diseases and conditions, and refer patients for timely treatment to specialists. Optometrists are helping to save health care dollars through early detection and appropriate treatment of sight-threatening conditions in children, seniors, working aged adults and the medically at risk.

At Queen's Park today, we have representatives from the Ontario Association of Optometrists. The OAO is a voluntary professional organization that represents nearly 1,000 registered optometrists in Ontario. In addition to providing resources and continuing education to its members, the OAO is committed to raising awareness of optometry and educating the public about the importance of professional eye care. Each year, for example, the OAO partners with the Ontario region of the Canadian Diabetes Association in raising awareness about the damaging effects that diabetes can have on your eyes.

The OAO is also working actively with educators on the importance of good vision in school and eye examination for children. The OAO is hosting an inaugural Optometrists on Site reception later today at Queen's Park. I'd encourage all the members in the Legislature to join us at that reception this evening.

PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITALS

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): In 1996, after the OPSEU strike, the Harris government decided it was going to get out of the business of running hospitals. Then-Minister of Health Jim Wilson promised that psychiatric hospitals and psychiatric patients would never be caught in the midst of a strike again. Yet this past spring, four of 10 psychiatric hospitals again faced the reality of striking workers, and patients in those hospitals paid a huge price. All 10 of the provincial hospitals were supposed to be transferred to either a public hospital or to a community board.

In the case of six hospitals, the divestment went ahead. The money to finish the job with the other four hospitals in Thunder Bay, North Bay, Whitby and Penetanguishene was supposed to have been in the last two budgets, but the Minister of Health apparently decided that he had a better use for the money. The budget for mental health facilities went underspent by $21 million two years ago and by more than $52 million last year.

In the meantime, patients in four psychiatric hospitals continue to experience the declining standard of care that is the inevitable consequence of this government's underfunding of its own hospitals.

The chairs of three of the hospitals' community advisory boards are here at Queen's Park today. The community advisory board at the Whitby hospital resigned en masse last June out of sheer frustration. The Minister of Health refuses to meet with these community board members. He won't tell them why or how long the patients in their hospitals will be left hanging. The Minister of Health has apparently decided that mental health isn't a hot enough political issue to spend money on, but he can't avoid this forever. The consequences for patients will be his responsibility. It's past time for this minister to finish the job his government started six years ago.

BILL FERRIER

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): How far we have come over the last number of years as MPPs in this Legislature. I have had the pleasure today to bring to lunch Bill Ferrier, who was the member for Cochrane South from 1967 and consecutively for three elections. We had an interesting discussion about how the work in this Legislature has changed over the years. He hearkened back to the days when we didn't have time allocation motions in this House and you really did have debate, where members came to this House and had to convince each other of their ideas, and that the House, in some ways, used to work, I would argue, probably more progressively than it does.

He also talked about how they did the work as local MPPs in their own ridings back then. Bill talked about how Jean, his wife, who just passed away unfortunately about a couple of weeks ago, was his constituency assistant because members back then in 1967 and onwards had no constituency staff, had no constituency offices, had no assistance whatsoever. They used to sit in this House, write their letters themselves on their desk.

They used to get on the train to get back to their ridings up in northern Ontario because travel was not paid for to the extent that it is now for members, and how when he got back to his constituency late on Friday night or on Saturday morning, basically Jean had everything laid out for him -- the people he had to speak with, the people she had talked to, and how the phone rang all the time at the home -- again, just the family to deal with that. I just reflect back to 1967 and say, we've learned a couple of things since then.

We are certainly more privileged as members, but I would like to get back to a time when we don't have time allocation motions, such as the time when Bill was here.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Just before the next member begins, maybe we could recognize our former colleague, Mr Bill Ferrier, from the riding of Cochrane South. He's in the members' gallery west. Would all the members please welcome our honoured colleague.

Applause.

MISSISSAUGA ARTS AWARDS

Mrs Margaret Marland (Mississauga South): The Mississauga Arts Council honoured a dazzling array of talent at this year's Mississauga Arts Awards Gala Night, held at the Living Arts Centre on October 16, 2002. Recognizing both established and emerging talent in the visual, new media, literary and performing arts, this spectacular evening provided an exciting preview of our city's bright artistic future.

From an impressive field of 100 nominees and 20 finalists the 2002 winners were: Juliana Schewe, visual artist -- emerging; Tom La Pierre, visual artist -- established; Patrick Thornton, new media artist -- emerging; Rachel Sa, literary artist -- emerging; Robert Sawyer, literary artist -- established; Christopher Miranda, performing artist, individual -- emerging; Rik Emmett, performing artist, individual -- established; Cow Over Moon, performing arts group -- emerging; Mississauga Players, performing arts group -- established.

I was honoured to present the Laurie Pallett Patron of the Arts Award to Bette Pauli, who has gone beyond the call of duty over many years to help fellow artists.

On behalf of the Premier of Ontario and all residents of Mississauga, I extend our congratulations and appreciation to these fine artists who so deeply enrich our lives. We are also grateful for the leadership from the corporate community and all the sponsors and supporters who make these awards possible.

LUNG CANCER AWARENESS MONTH

Mr David Caplan (Don Valley East): In Canada this year alone, almost 21,000 Canadians will be diagnosed with lung cancer, and approximately 80% will die from this disease.

Unfortunately, for people diagnosed with lung cancer, treatment is limited and support is minimal. People who have been touched by lung cancer call it the "invisible killer" because it receives little public attention and lower amounts of funding when compared to research dollars spent on other types of cancer. They feel that this reflects the common misconception that lung cancer is simply a disease of smokers.

ALCASE, the Alliance for Lung Cancer Awareness, Support and Education, has recently been established as an organization to increase awareness about lung cancer, to support patients who are currently living with lung cancer and individuals who care for them, and to educate the public about the disease.

As part of their efforts, ALCASE has proclaimed November as Lung Cancer Awareness Month. I join them in urging the provincial government to lead the way in educating its citizens about the risk of lung cancer and the resources available to them. With more knowledge, more patients can be diagnosed in the early stages, when the chance of long-term survival is as high as 85%.

I hope members of this Legislature will take the time to read the information that ALCASE has provided to all members for your reference. I want to thank the board president, Ralph Gouda, and Laurie Bass, a member of their public relations committee and daughter of one of my constituents, Wayne Jacoby, for ensuring this valuable message has been brought to our attention. I want to wish them every success in their efforts in attracting needed attention to this killer disease.

At this point, on a point of order, Mr Speaker, I would seek unanimous consent of the House for members to wear the white ribbon supplied by ALCASE to all members in support of Lung Cancer Awareness Month.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is there unanimous consent? Agreed? Agreed. The honourable member has consent.

CLARINGTON GREEN GAELS

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): I am pleased to rise and put on the record an outstanding success of the Clarington Green Gaels Junior B lacrosse team. This past summer, they captured the Founders Cup Junior B championship in Halton Hills. It was their third Founders Cup in the past five years. The Green Gaels also won the championship in 1998 and 2000.

The Clarington Green Gaels are an excellent example of the importance that residents of Durham riding place on sports and fitness. The Green Gaels are excellent ambassadors for our community and a source of pride to the many fans who attend the home games at the Garnet B. Rickard complex in Bowmanville. The Gaels were the underdogs this year after losing to the Spartan Warriors of St Catharines in Ontario Lacrosse Association finals, but they, like me, didn't give up. In the championship, they won five games in five days. On their way to winning the Founders Cup, the Green Gaels defeated New Westminster, Edmonton and Winnipeg.

Congratulations to head coach Brad MacArthur, his staff and of course the players who worked so hard this past season. Among the members of the team who were recognized with awards from the tournament were Marvin Barr, who was declared the most valuable player, and goalie Rick Passfield, who was named to the all-star team. Also named as a tournament all-star was Zach Greer. Congratulations also to Doug Trudeau, who scored the final two goals in the championship game.

The Green Gaels of Clarington have worked hard in this championship season, and as their MPP I share this with them and with the House today: a great achievement for the Green Gaels lacrosse team.

HYDRO RATES

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): Families across Ontario today are wondering how they are going to pay their hydro bills. Our offices are being flooded with phone calls, e-mails and letters from people who cannot believe how much the Harris-Eves government has bungled the hydro file.

It seems some Tory members can't believe it either. Gary Carr thinks you guys messed up. Frank Mazzilli says your incompetence is hurting people in London. Even Cam Jackson, the $104,000 man, can't believe how expensive hydro bills are. When a guy who spends more than $800 on a meal thinks the rates are too high, they're shockingly high.

But who is standing up for families in Waterloo-Wellington who are being gouged by these out-of-control hydro rates? It's not Ted Arnott. He hasn't said the word "hydro" in this House since 1996. Who is standing up for families in Ottawa-Orléans? Brian Coburn has never said the word "hydro" in this House. How about Gerry Martiniuk over in Cambridge? He's never said the word "hydro." Who is fighting for families in London Centre? It's not Dianne Cunningham. She hasn't talked about hydro since 1993. Gary Stewart hasn't talked about hydro since the year 2000. Tina Molinari never said the word in this House, neither has David Tsubouchi, Jerry Ouellette, Morley Kells or John Snobelen.

There's only one leader and there's only one party fighting for families on these outrageous hydro bills. That's Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberal Party.

HELLENIC CARE FOR SENIORS

Ms Marilyn Mushinski (Scarborough Centre): I'm pleased to rise in this House today to thank my colleague, the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care, for visiting my riding of Scarborough Centre last Wednesday. I especially want to thank him for attending the groundbreaking of the new Hellenic Care for Seniors long-term-care facility located at Lawrence and Kennedy in my riding. The new Hellenic home will consist of 128 new beds for the seniors of Scarborough. Other seniors will be drawn from other areas to this example of first-rate nursing home care.

I was pleased to be joined at this important event not only by the minister but by His Eminence Metropolitan Archbishop Sotirios. We had a good chat.

The new seniors' home is a classic example of co-operation between the Ernie Eves government and the diverse communities that make up the Scarborough I am so pleased to serve in this Legislature.

It's very important to recognize the great strides that are being taken by this government for our seniors. The groundbreaking is part of a bigger plan being put in place by my Scarborough colleague the Honourable Dan Newman, Associate Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Altogether, new and redeveloped beds are being created across Ontario as part of the Ernie Eves government's unprecedented $1.2-billion investment in long-term care for the seniors of today and tomorrow. The groundbreaking is an example of good government at work in our communities.

VISITORS

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I want to introduce to the Legislature some special guests we have in from Nipigon who are sitting in the members' west gallery. We have Levina Collins, project coordinator for the township of Nipigon economic development office, a great hard worker. She's accompanied by Nyomie Ray, who was a summer student, I believe, with her office this summer, and Courtney Wellman, who is actually from Nepean, Ontario. Welcome to the Legislature. They're great hard workers for the township of Nipigon.

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I'm presenting on behalf of my colleague Tony Martin, who is at the Kimberly Rogers inquest today, Mr Jim Steele, who is originally from Timmins but now lives in Sault Ste Marie and who is the father of Alexander, a page in our Legislative Assembly. I'd like to welcome him to the Legislature today.

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton West): On a point of order, Speaker: I would ask your indulgence and that of the members of the House to welcome my mother, June Christopherson, to the chamber. Along with my mom is our family friend Beatrice Harrison, and Zack Dayler, who is a co-op student in my office. I take particular pride in also recognizing my mom's brother, Uncle Chuck Clapham, who is a World War II veteran. Thanks to him, we get to be here today. Thank you all.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I thank the honourable member and we welcome his mother here.

The member for Davenport on a point of order.

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): On the subject, Mr Speaker: our page Grant Gonzales's mother and sister are here, Merlina Gonzales and Glenda Gonzales, and Sheryl Hennessey, the godmother of our page Grant Gonzales. Let's welcome them as well.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

GRAFFITI AND ADVERTISING SIGNS

CONTROL ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002

SUR LE CONTRÔLE DES GRAFFITIS

ET DES PANNEAUX PUBLICITAIRES

Mr Kells moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 205,

An Act to control graffiti on public and private property and advertising signs on public property / Projet de loi 205, Loi visant à contrôler les graffitis sur des biens publics et privés et des panneaux publicitaires sur des biens publics.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

The member for short statement?

Mr Morley Kells (Etobicoke-Lakeshore): The bill prohibits applying or affixing graffiti to any public or private property and prohibits erecting or attaching advertising signs to public property. If a municipality enacts a bylaw in respect of the control of graffiti and advertising signs, insofar as the bylaw is more stringent, the bylaw prevails over the bill.

TRANSPARENCY

IN PUBLIC MATTERS ACT, 2002 /

LOI DE 2002 SUR LA TRANSPARENCE

DES QUESTIONS D'INTÉRÊT PUBLIC

Ms Di Cocco moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 206,

An Act to require open meetings for provincial and municipal boards, commissions and other public bodies / Projet de loi 206, Loi exigeant des réunions publiques pour des commissions et conseils provinciaux et municipaux ainsi que d'autres organismes publics.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

The member for short statement?

Ms Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton): This bill requires that public bodies hold meetings which are open to the public. The public can only be excluded from meetings of the body if certain specified types of matters are going to be discussed by that body. Minutes of these meetings, open to the public, have to be made available to the public in a timely fashion and must contain sufficient detail.

The body is also required to set rules respecting public notice of its meetings and meetings of its committees, the availability of these minutes to the public and the availability to the public of the body's rules. The body is required to appoint a person responsible for compliance with the rules, and

section 8 imposes a penalty for failure to comply with the requirements for notices, minutes and rules.

MOTIONS

HOUSE SITTINGS

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): I move that pursuant to standing order 9(c)(i), the House shall meet from 6:45 pm to 9:30 pm on Monday, November 4, Tuesday, November 5, Wednesday, November 6, and Thursday, November 7, 2002, for the purpose of considering government business.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour of the motion will please say "aye."

All those opposed will please say "nay."

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1354 to 1359.

The Speaker: Would the members kindly take their seats, please?

All those in favour of the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Agostino, Dominic

Arnott, Ted

Baird, John R.

Bartolucci, Rick

Beaubien, Marcel

Bountrogianni, Marie

Boyer, Claudette

Bradley, James J.

Caplan, David

Chudleigh, Ted

Clark, Brad

Cleary, John C.

Clement, Tony

Coburn, Brian

Colle, Mike

Curling, Alvin

DeFaria, Carl

Di Cocco, Caroline

Dombrowsky, Leona

Duncan, Dwight

Dunlop, Garfield

Ecker, Janet

Elliott, Brenda

Flaherty, Jim

Galt, Doug

Gerretsen, John

Gilchrist, Steve

Gill, Raminder

Gravelle, Michael

Hastings, John

Hodgson, Chris

Hudak, Tim

Jackson, Cameron

Johns, Helen

Johnson, Bert

Kells, Morley

Klees, Frank

Kwinter, Monte

Marland, Margaret

Martiniuk, Gerry

Maves, Bart

Mazzilli, Frank

McDonald, AL

McLeod, Lyn

McMeekin, Ted

Miller, Norm

Molinari, Tina R.

Mushinski, Marilyn

Newman, Dan

O'Toole, John

Parsons, Ernie

Patten, Richard

Phillips, Gerry

Pupatello, Sandra

Ramsay, David

Ruprecht, Tony

Sampson, Rob

Sergio, Mario

Sorbara, Greg

Spina, Joseph

Sterling, Norman W.

Stockwell, Chris

Tascona, Joseph N.

Tsubouchi, David H.

Turnbull, David

Wettlaufer, Wayne

Witmer, Elizabeth

Wood, Bob

The Speaker: All those opposed will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

Bisson, Gilles

Hampton, Howard

Kormos, Peter

Marchese, Rosario

Martel, Shelley

Prue, Michael

Clerk of the House (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 68; the nays are 6.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

VISITORS

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Just before we begin with oral questions, we have with us today in the Speaker's gallery the parliamentary interns from the federal program in Ottawa. Please join me in welcoming our special guests.

ORAL QUESTIONS

HYDRO RATES

Mrs Sandra Pupatello (Windsor West): My question is for the Minister of Energy. I have in my hands a copy of Bill 35. You remember that act: it was the one in which Ernie Eves, Jim Wilson and Mike Harris promised that consumers would actually be protected, and that would lower hydro rates. So that no one was confused, they actually named that piece of legislation "An Act to create jobs and protect consumers by promoting low-cost energy through competition...." You remember that bill.

Across the province, employers big and small are considering layoffs so that they can pay their utility bills. The rates in fact are going up, not down, and consumers are saying that they've been betrayed by you. Instead of being protected, they are being gouged by your government. Why did you and Ernie Eves bungle the opening of the market and break your promise to taxpayers?

Hon John R. Baird (Minister of Energy, minister responsible for francophone affairs): I'm certainly familiar with Bill 35. I sat on that legislative committee. I will suggest --

Interjection: We can't hear you.

Hon Mr Baird: Then maybe you should listen.

There are a lot of consumers in Ontario who are not just concerned about the bills they have in their hands but about what the future holds, whether that be a working family, a small business or a farm operator. We understand that concern. The Premier has requested that I look at the issue of rebates and what can be done to acknowledge that this is really a problem.

I would indicate in strong terms to the member opposite that the view of the government, when we introduced Bill 35, was that we had to keep hydro rates lower than they would have been if we had taken no action.

Interjection.

Hon Mr Baird: If the member opposite checks the Hansard from that committee, that's actually what they'll find. In fact, we haven't had public power at cost in this province; we've actually had public power at cost minus $38 billion.

Mrs Pupatello: I guess you're telling us it would be worse if you had done nothing.

I have in my hands a press release issued by then-Minister of Energy, Jim Wilson, two months before the market opening. It promises right there in a big, bold title, "Customers to Save $3-$6 Billion Under Electricity Competition." The customers are supposed to save, and he called that estimate conservative. We call it wrong.

On June 25, Ernie Eves stood in that spot and promised, "There is not going to be an electricity shortage and higher and higher prices." Wrong again.

The Harris-Eves government broke its promise to consumers about lower rates. You broke your promise to investors of greater certainty, and you've broken your promise of a reliable supply of new electricity. Given all of these promises, given your bungling, tell me why anyone should trust Ernie Eves to fix the hydro mess that he created?

Hon Mr Baird: I certainly acknowledge the concerns that families and small business people right across the province of Ontario have in this issue. The Premier has asked that we look into it and what has caused these increases and report back to him.

I would indicate the analysis done and quoted by my colleague was by Dr Fred Lazar, a professor of economics at York University, who looked at what the cost would be had we undertaken no change in Ontario after a substantial freeze in rates by successive governments, and look at what they would be under the new model.

The member opposite quotes Jim Wilson. I'm going to quote Dalton McGuinty: "Rates may very well have to go up. We've been getting a bit of a free ride here in terms of the hydro debt that Ontario Hydro has amassed" -- and that's not Jim Wilson; that's your own leader, Dalton McGuinty.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Final supplementary.

Mrs Pupatello: I'll have to be sure to tell my constituents that that's the kind of answer we get from the Minister of Energy: a completely unsympathetic ear to people who cannot afford to pay their bills. It's that simple. Individuals in their homes and businesses cannot pay these increases. We cannot get a sympathetic ear from Premier Ernie Eves. This is what he said: "The reality is, nobody likes to pay more for anything."

That's not what people in Ontario want to hear, Minister. Talk about being out of touch. Ernie Eves doesn't get it. Rather than working to find solutions, he's looking for scapegoats. His first instance is to blame Mike Harris. Wrong. It was Ernie Eves and not Mike Harris. Now he wants to blame the OPG. Guess what? He is OPG. He's the only shareholder. Besides, Ernie Eves himself was warned by the provincial government about problems at Pickering. The auditor told him and he did nothing. He tries to blame the management of OPG.

Ernie Eves looks like he's looking after his friends, like Bill Farlinger, the $300,000-a-year man. While the Premier blames and looks for scapegoats, the public --

The Speaker: I'm afraid the member's time is up.

Hon Mr Baird: The member opposite never lets the facts get in the way of a good rant. The Premier is very concerned about this issue. He's concerned about the effects on working families. He's concerned about farmers who are concerned about the future viability of their operation and about small businesses around Ontario. He's asked me to report back in short order with respect to what we can do to address those concerns, whether it's through the rebate or through others. The member opposite is dead wrong. There is a huge amount of concern that we have out there, not just for working families but for businesses in the province.

The member opposite didn't quote those quotes because they don't suit her own partisan purposes. The member opposite neglects to talk about how her own party was trolling for bucks on Bay Street, saying that she and Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberal Party have been consistent supporters of the move to an open market. This doesn't fit the arguments of the member opposite. What did she say? "Throughout Ontario's electricity restructuring process, Dalton and the Ontario Liberals have been consistent supporters of the move to an open market." Stand --

The Speaker: I'm afraid the minister's time is up. Come to order, please.

Ms Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton): Minister, when your government was orchestrating this electricity mess, there were assurances that with the market opening there were going to be lower prices, plenty of supply, and stability from your electricity brainchild. I have a letter from the Inn of the Good Shepherd in my riding that says, "Utility bills' arrears have been the number one factor contributing to the growing problem of homelessness during this past year." I've heard from people on fixed incomes, on disability and from small businesses who don't know where they can turn. Mike from Corunna just wrote to me, saying that his bill for the low-usage period has gone up 100%, increased.

Dorothy, whose husband needs oxygen, a night cycler and air, had her bill go from $102 to $258. Ramin, a small business owner, whose hydro jumped from $1,884 for two months to $1,500 per month.

Minister, how do you explain this mess? How and when are you going to fix it?

Hon Mr Baird: I certainly share the concerns of anyone on a modest or fixed income who has concerns with respect to their hydro bill. That's why the Premier has asked that we look at the rebate and how we can provide relief to consumers.

Interjection.

Hon Mr Baird: People who pay 5.5 cents shouldn't get a rebate as if they pay 8.3 cents. But I say to the member for Sarnia-Lambton, we are looking at the issue.

The member opposite has said that she believes homelessness has been fuelled for the period of a year. Well, rates were frozen for seven years, until May 1. They went down in May, they went down in June and residents wouldn't have received their bills for July and August until September, so I suggest there were probably a number of other contributing factors to that.

We do have a concern with supply in Ontario. I acknowledge that. The member opposite might want to explain her personal view that we should close down 24% of the production in the province as their answer to the supply problem. The lights will be out, there will be brownouts and they will be brought to the people by the member for Sarnia-Lambton who would put 300 of her own constituents out of a job. That's quite an economic development initiative for Sarnia-Lambton.

The Speaker: Supplementary?

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): Thomas Green of Tweed is 64 years old. He heats his house with electricity, and he's worried that he won't be able to pay his bills this winter. His hydro rate has more than doubled since June. This man has worked his entire life, and on the eve of his retirement, he expects that his hydro bill will be almost $700. In another case, a family on social assistance because of a disability must choose between paying the rent or paying their hydro bill. Their hydro bill for July was $132; in September they got a whopping $480 bill.

It is unacceptable that the Premier has dismissed these issues when he says, "No one likes to pay higher prices." His indifference and your incompetence are forcing people to choose between buying food or paying the rent. What are you going to do for families on fixed incomes who cannot pay their hydro bills?

Hon Mr Baird: We have a tremendous concern about those on fixed and modest incomes, whether they be social assistance recipients, seniors or those people with modest incomes who are working. The Premier has asked me to look at it.

The member opposite talked about bill increases in June. She would want to be clear, though, that while prices were frozen for seven years in the province of Ontario, she would want to say of course that they went down by more than a third in May and almost a similar amount in June. She would want to be honest to customers.

I do find it passing strange that this member represents a party that on second reading, agreement in principle, voted for Bill 35. She would want to ask that. I know this member opposite certainly has problems managing her own household finances, but at least her constituents aren't seeking public redress from the Board of Internal Economy.

The Speaker: Final supplementary.

Mrs Marie Bountrogianni (Hamilton Mountain): Minister of Energy, we know --

Interjections.

The Speaker: The member for Hamilton Mountain has the floor. Come to order.

Interjection.

The Speaker: That means you, member for Windsor-St Clair, please. It's your member asking the question. The member for Hamilton-Mountain, please.

Mrs Bountrogianni: Minister of Energy, let's stick to the topic at hand, and that is hydro prices for people on fixed incomes. No one is doubting your personal concern, Minister, but we are doubting the concern of the Premier when he says, "The reality is, nobody likes to pay more for anything any more." That shows what he truly believes. This is not about liking to pay more. The Premier should be ashamed to even suggest such a thing.

People's bills have more than doubled. On Saturday, within one hour on Hamilton Mountain, over 3,000 people signed a petition protesting your sale of Hydro One and asking for the immediate release of the rebate. People, particularly senior citizens, are worried that they're going to lose their homes. Minister, will you end this assault on the people of Ontario now?

Hon Mr Baird: I do appreciate the member opposite's comments that "No one is doubting your personal concern." In fact, her own colleagues did that, and I'd like to acknowledge the member opposite understands that all of us in this place do come to Queen's Park to try to improve the lives of our constituents and to do a better job to improve their lives.

The Premier said publicly in very strong terms on both Thursday and Friday that he was tremendously concerned about those on fixed incomes. I'm wondering why the member opposite doesn't want to use those quotes.

The Premier is concerned about this. He has asked me to look into both the rebate and the situation that those on fixed incomes are facing. We acknowledge that whether it's for small businesses, working families or farm operators, they're concerned not just about the bills they've got in front of them but they're also concerned about the future. In short order, we'll be coming forward with some responses.

The Speaker: New question. The leader of the third party.

Mr Howard Hampton (Kenora-Rainy River): My question is for the Minister of Energy. The number of Conservative MPPs who oppose the skyrocketing hydro bills that come with hydro deregulation is growing by leaps and bounds. Last week it was Gary Carr. Now it's Frank Mazzilli, Cam Jackson and -- oh, yes -- the Minister of Transportation, Brad Clark; he'd like to be in there, too.

Minister, when are you going to start listening to your own MPPs? They're telling you that talking about a one-time rebate, trying to hide the increases in hydro bills, won't work. They want a rate freeze. They want hydro rates to go back to what they were a year ago. Will you do that, Minister? Will you listen to your own backbench MPPs and terminate hydro deregulation?

Hon Mr Baird: I'll say to the leader of the third party that at least I can respect him on this issue. He has been a consistent fighter on this issue. He's not like Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberal Party --

Interjections.

Hon Mr Baird: You had to stand in your place and vote that Bill 35 in principle --

The Speaker: Order. Take your seat. It's getting too noisy in here.

Hon Mr Baird: When the opportunity came to stand and be counted, the leader of the third party was there, leading the fight. But who was standing up in favour of competition, an open market and collecting $350 from anyone on Bay Street who would agree with them? It was Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberal Party.

Mr Hampton: I want to return to the question, which you didn't answer. I want to put it in the words of Garfield Dunlop's campaign manager --

Interjections.

The Speaker: Will the member take his seat? This is the last warning for the member for Windsor-St Clair. If I get up again, he'll be out for the day. I apologize. You get to start over. I'm just warning the member for Windsor-St Clair. He got a last warning. The leader of the third party may start over.

Mr Hampton: I want to refer to another MPP's -- Garfield Dunlop's -- campaign manager, Mr Bob Kehoe, who says, "I'm a lifelong Conservative." He says in the Orillia Packet and Times that hydroelectricity is an essential public service. He says, "Certain things such as education, health care and the electricity system should remain in the public control." He says, "I don't believe we should be selling off and opening up electricity to private interests.

It should be a public service, owned by taxpayers for taxpayers." Get this: like the MPP for Oakville, he is circulating a petition that demands the government dispense with the competitive electricity market and revert to the system that was in place before May 1.

I ask the question again, Minister: when are you going to start listening to your own Conservative MPPs, your own campaign managers, and terminate hydro deregulation?

Hon Mr Baird: We certainly hear the concerns, whether they be members on this side of the House, small business people or a working family struggling to pay the bill they've got on their kitchen table today, or their concern for the future with the bill that will be coming in next month. We're looking at how we deal with a rebate mechanism that would provide some support to these people who are concerned about themselves, their future and their family. We're also concerned about what holds for the future. The Premier has asked me to look into it, and I've committed to do that in short order, because the Premier, along with members on this side of the House, shares that concern.

I do again at least acknowledge that the member opposite has been consistent. Look at what his own colleague said. The official spokesman for Dalton McGuinty and the Ontario Liberal Party: "Let me be clear. We need a competitive marketplace. The electricity market that we as Liberals envisage is one where we see a competitive market in the generation of electricity." At least the honourable member has been consistent on this issue.

Mr Hampton: Minister, I hear both you and the Liberals talking about a hydro rebate. You would know this: just this week, the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in Ontario has had to lay off seven of their staff because their hydro bill has gone from $5,000 a month to $11,000 a month. What good would a $200 or $300 hydro rebate do for them? What good would it do for the majority of small businesses in this province? Virtually nothing.

The issue is this: hydro deregulation, no matter where it's been tried, has driven up people's hydro bills. That's what happened in California, that's what happened in Alberta, that's what happened in Montana and that's what's happening in Ontario. So no amount of playing with money over here or trying to bribe taxpayers with their own money through a rebate is going to do the job. Will you recognize hydro deregulation provides too many opportunities for price-fixing? It provides too many opportunities for market manipulation by companies like Enron. What you need to do is terminate --

The Speaker: The member's time is up.

Hon Mr Baird: Like I said, we certainly share the concerns and the Premier has asked me to look into it. We'll continue to do that in short order.

The member opposite spoke of one organization, a charitable organization, where he said they would receive only a $200 rebate. Yet if they had to let go seven people, if they were making $15,000 a year, that would be $75,000. I would suggest that a rebate would be greater than $200 for someone who had to slash expenditures by $75,000. I think he would acknowledge that if he was being straightforward.

We are looking at the issue. We feel the concern that people of Ontario have in this issue. The reality is the member opposite is driving around Ontario in a bus preaching public power at cost. We have not had public power at cost in the province of Ontario for years. While the leader of the third party and his band of socialists sat on the executive council, they borrowed $3 billion. Who is going to pay that? His children and his children's children. We don't think that was either sustainable or responsible for the future.

The Speaker: The minister's time is up.

New question, the leader of the third party again.

Mr Hampton: To the Minister of Energy, yes, I go around Ontario pointing out that we should have a regulated hydro system. It should be hydroelectricity at cost.

The reason I do is because if I look at, again, California, if I look at Alberta, if I look at Montana and if I look at what's happened in Ontario, deregulated hydro, privatized hydro means you get a whole bunch of profit-takers who all want to get their hands into the consumer's pocket and take some money, and you get Enron-style corporations that want to manipulate the electricity supply, create an artificial electricity shortage, drive up the price and gouge consumers. I don't think anybody should entertain hydro deregulation the way Conservatives and Liberals have.

So I say to you again, Minister, recognize that rebates won't do the trick. The kinds of incentives that the Liberals are talking about won't do the trick. End hydro deregulation. Recognize this is an essential public service that should be owned and controlled by the people.

Hon Mr Baird: We recognize that the policy the member opposite used was not successful. What he continued to do when he was in government was to take the Ontario Hydro credit card and borrow more and more money each and every year. He talks about public power at cost, but his actions speak louder than his words.

We're looking at what is the responsible approach to take for this year and for the years ahead to ensure that we can have a ready supply of safe and affordable electricity for the people of Ontario. Whether it's for working families, small businesses, farm operators or large industry, it's important for the people of Ontario. We long ago lost the plan that was envisaged with respect to public power at cost. That's not even a policy that he supported. We are looking at whether it's the cost of generation, what could be done with the rebate.

We're also looking at what the reasons are for other bill increases to see what we can do to help acknowledge what is a real concern for the people of Ontario.

Mr Hampton: Minister, I hear you on the one hand saying that you believe hydro prices may have to rise higher. That was your statement in estimates committee, that hydro rates were unrealistically low and they might have to go higher to entice private investors in. I hear the Liberal energy critic saying that you may need to provide tax incentives or some other enticement to the Enrons and the Brascans, as if they're not making enough money already, to entice them into the province.

How much taxpayers' money are you and the Liberals prepared to spend? How much taxpayers' money are you and the Liberals prepared to waste trying to entice the Brascans, the Sithe Energies and the Enrons to build profitable, profit-driven hydro generating stations in Ontario? How much are you prepared to spend, rather than doing what you should do: terminate deregulation?

Hon Mr Baird: I've corrected the leader of the third party before and I'll do it again. He should check the Hansard. I said no such thing. He knows it and I know it. People can check the written transcripts of that committee. He knows I never said it and he should be straightforward with the people of Ontario.

What the member opposite is asking is, how much would we spend? We won't put Ontario into an $11-billion deficit; we won't allow a $3-billion increase in such a short period of time on the Ontario Hydro debt as he did when he was in power; we won't allow it to be acceptable in Ontario to go from spending $4 billion a year on interest to more than $9 billion, as he and his party did in the province of Ontario. But at least I can look the member in the eye and know that he's been consistent.

The members opposite said they didn't vote in favour of Bill 35. On June 25, 1998, on second reading, agreement in principle on the bill, what was the vote count? It was 60 to 10. New Democrats were the only ones who stood up against competition. The Liberals are strongly in favour of this policy.

ONTARIO DISABILITY

SUPPORT PROGRAM

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): My question is for the Minister of Community, Family and Children's Services. Dalton McGuinty often speaks of the just-in-time families who live in our communities. These are families who, faced with an unexpected bill like a car repair, are cast into financially dire straits. Often, for them, the only discretionary funds are for food. You can just imagine the effect on these families of the new electricity bills from your deregulated environment. You know -- you should know -- the absolutely devastating effect on Ontarians who are recipients of ODSP.

These are people who are already, at the absolute maximum, $7,000 below the poverty level in this province. They come to me with a question that I'm going to pass on to you for your answer. They say to me, "This month, should we pay our electricity bill or should we buy groceries?"

Minister, what is the answer that you would like me to pass on to these citizens on ODSP?

Hon Brenda Elliott (Minister of Community, Family and Children's Services): I thank my colleague from the Liberal Party for the question. As he will know, our government is very concerned about people with disabilities in Ontario, that's why it was our government that removed those with disabilities from the welfare file and created the Ontario disability support plan. It's also our government that was the first government to introduce the Ontarians with Disabilities Act. So we understand the challenges that those with disabilities face in Ontario. We've made great efforts to try to improve circumstances for their lives.

At present, gas and hydro expenses are covered under the shelter allowance. In extraordinary cases, caseworkers can issue a cheque to cover the actual cost of hydro or any other unexpected expense. We believe that no one in the circumstance of unexpected challenges should lose their home or place to live. That is why this government does already have in place provisions to deal with extraordinary costs, including paying for electricity.

Mr Parsons: Minister, I and others are disappointed in that answer. You have sent these people to poverty. It is a shameful reflection on this province, on how you handle Ontarians with disabilities.

Hon Mrs Elliott: Is it?

Mr Parsons: Please let me finish, Minister. This is not funny. They are choosing between electricity and food. Certainly there is a discretionary fund, but you capped the non-health discretionary funds that municipalities have to give out. I'm asking you -- and I'm almost embarrassed to ask the question -- if you will immediately raise the ODSP to the poverty level. It should be far above, but would you simply move it to the poverty level and remove these people from making the decision of do they buy food or do they have heat and electricity in their home. Minister, their increases do not begin to match the increases caused by the electricity gouging that is taking place.

Hon Mrs Elliott: While I tried to be very clear in my answer; I will try again. Perhaps I do need to speak slowly so the member across can understand what I said. I said that this government cares. We already have measures in place to deal with extraordinary circumstances for those who are on fixed incomes under the Ontario disability support plan. I said, and I will repeat, that in extraordinary circumstances caseworkers can issue a cheque to cover the actual expenses of hydro or any other unexpected expense. We have provisions in place to deal with extraordinary costs, including costs to keep electricity running.

KYOTO PROTOCOL

Mr Garfield Dunlop (Simcoe North): My question today is for the Minister of the Environment. Basically, I'd like to --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. Give the member the chance to ask the question, please.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order. The member for Simcoe North has the floor.

Mr Dunlop: My question is for the Minister of the Environment. I'd like him, if he could, to give us an update on what's happening with Kyoto at the present time.

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): Obviously, some members opposite don't think it's an important issue facing the province or the country today, and I do. Considering the recent events and the ministers of environment meeting in Halifax, that a request that the federal government have a first ministers' meeting was refused by the Prime Minister, it was disturbing to say the least.

The impact of Kyoto, I think, has been universally accepted around this country, that the impact statements and the studies provided by the federal government are weak, not completely fulsome, and the questions that have been put by the provinces have not been answered. I was very, very, encouraged to read that the public has changed its mind dramatically and that they would like some fulsome information too with respect to this. I'd like to follow that up, hopefully, in the supplementary.

Mr Dunlop: Minister, can you update us on what the federal government is actually trying to do before the Christmas season? Is it possible to get that answer? There seems to be a lot of dialogue floating around, but everybody wants to know exactly what our federal government is actually up to before the Christmas season begins.

Hon Mr Stockwell: The provinces at the last meeting were very clear. They suggested to the federal government that they need more explanation on exactly what Kyoto means: costs, impact studies, megaton reductions, credits etc. I know we stood in this House last week and there was much ballyhoo from the opposite side about 70% or 80% of the public supporting Kyoto, and they were prepared to sign last week. Both leaders suggested we should sign on to Kyoto.

We've discovered that maybe that just isn't the case. Maybe the public in the province of Ontario have taken a sober second look. They'd like to know the impacts cost. They'd like to know the job cost. They'd like to know the investment cost. They'd like to know what the economic impact is to the people of the province of Ontario. So I can only take a large sigh of relief that this government decided not to follow the instructions of those two parties opposite, listened to what they thought would be the best approach to take and -- that's my leadership -- now today the public said, "Boy, maybe the Conservatives were right. Before we buy a pig in a poke, maybe we should examine this project."

HYDRO RATES

Mr Ted McMeekin (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Aldershot): My question is for the beleaguered Minister of Energy. Hydro from a different perspective: we've a very significant local problem impacting the Waterdown Legion and our precious war veterans. Since deregulation of the hydro market, the Waterdown Legion's hydro bill has climbed 149%. Minister, the Waterdown Legion is, as you know, a charitable organization. The impact of this 149% increase is simply devastating, as I suspect it is with other legions across the province.

Here's what Legion treasurer Gary Titley told the Flamborough Post last week: "The increases are having an effect on the way the legion does business. We've had to reassess our commitment to our community just to meet projected utility costs."

Minister, this isn't right. Will you stand in your place today and tell these veterans what your government plans to do to help them?

Hon John R. Baird (Minister of Energy, minister responsible for francophone affairs): Providing supports to organizations, to individuals, to working families and small businesses in the province is tremendously important for the people of Ontario. It's tremendously important for their government. The Premier has asked me to review the whole issue of rebates and what can be done to help address these concerns with respect to taxpayers in the province of Ontario, and that's what we're doing.

The member opposite may want to ask his own official spokesman, his own party critic, Sean Conway, who was quoted in the Ottawa Citizen: "Conway said Ontarians paid artificially low electricity prices for years while the provincially owned power utility piled up billions of dollars in debt." We acknowledge there are concerns out there. We're working on solutions. I will say to the member opposite that the old way, where we simply took out the Ontario Hydro credit card and borrowed money from our children and our grandchildren, is not the way to go. It's not what anyone in the province would envisage.

Mr McMeekin: Artificially low? These rates are up 149%, for goodness' sake, and now, just a week before Remembrance Day, our Waterdown war veterans may have to sacrifice significant community work simply to pay their hydro bills.

Minister, our war veterans are frustrated and angry with your government. Don't take my word for it. Here's what Gary Titley said further in the

article I quoted earlier: "Other businesses wouldn't be able to get away with this. This is mismanagement. Someone was asleep at the wheel."

When will you finally admit that your government's hydro policy is not working: not working for residential consumers, not working for small business consumers, not working for Ontario charities and not working, as we discovered today, for our war veterans?

Hon Mr Baird: Obviously it's a tremendous concern when any community organization like the Royal Canadian Legion, which provides excellent services to a lot of vulnerable people, including veterans and other community support groups, is facing some significant financial challenges. We acknowledge that, and we are looking at what we can do in terms of a rebate mechanism that would provide a measure of relief and support for this group, for working families, for farmers, for small business people and for industry in the province.

When the member opposite stands in his place and speaks against deregulation, his own party, the Liberal Party of Ontario, and his leader, Dalton McGuinty, stood in their place and voted in favour of Bill 35 in principle in 1998. And what did Michael Bryant, the critic, say just last week? "Our position has not changed since 1997." I know he'd want to be honest to his constituents and point that out.

NURSE PRACTITIONERS

Mr Ted Arnott (Waterloo-Wellington): My question is for the Minister of Health. Since this government was elected in 1995, we have made health care a top priority. This year, the provincial government will spend over $25 billion on health care. This represents 47% of Ontario's total budget for this fiscal year. This is an all-time high. The government, since 1995, has increased spending on health care by 45%, or almost $8 billion.

One of the many provincial government initiatives on health care involves primary care reform, specifically supported by nurse practitioners. In Waterloo-Wellington, there is great interest in bringing nurse practitioners to our communities. Can the minister update my constituents and this House about the nurse practitioner program in Ontario?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): My honourable colleague is right: the nurse practitioner program is one of many initiatives that the Ernie Eves government is introducing to ensure that Ontario has timely access to universal and publicly funded health care. This year, our government has pledged $11 million for up to 117 new nurse practitioner positions in the province.

I'd like to take this opportunity to dispel some of the myths about nurse practitioners. Many people hear the term "nurse practitioner" and simply think of a registered nurse, and yet a nurse practitioner is more than that. They have been trained to take on additional responsibilities. They are one step closer to being a general practitioner in the medical sense. For example, you can go to a nurse practitioner and get an annual physical examination. If you're concerned about a lump or other abnormality, a nurse practitioner can order a mammogram without having to wait for an appointment with a GP.

We have listened to Ontarians. Primary care reform is the top priority for them and it is for us as well.

Mr Arnott: I've taken a great personal interest in the nurse practitioner program in our province. I know that my constituents in Waterloo-Wellington will benefit significantly from their services.

I'm aware that the Ministry of Health recently announced the commencement of the nurse practitioner application process. I was very encouraged to learn that there are plans to bring nurse practitioners to my constituency of Waterloo-Wellington. Could the minister inform the House about how many nurse practitioners the communities of Wellington and Waterloo are eligible to receive? Second, could the minister indicate a timeframe as to when we will have these nurse practitioners in place, serving the health care needs of the residents of Waterloo-Wellington?

Hon Mr Clement: This year, 31 communities are eligible to apply for nurse practitioners. I am delighted to inform my colleague for Waterloo-Wellington that the Waterloo region will be eligible to receive up to 11 new nurse practitioners, while Wellington county will be eligible to receive up to seven new NPs. The deadline for submissions is December 13. The ministry will review each application, and decisions will be announced next January.

I would like to add that many of the nurse practitioners, including those in Waterloo-Wellington, could begin serving their communities very shortly after their applications have been approved. Applications are found on the Ministry of Health's Web site and can be submitted -- actually, HealthyOntario.com is the best place to receive this information. Certainly we are also interested in submissions by interested groups within the 31 communities.

We are there for nurse practitioners and we are there for the people of Ontario.

HYDRO RATES

Mr Michael Prue (Beaches-East York): My question is to the Minister of Energy. You are now six months into one of the most disastrous policies any government of this province has ever undertaken. Ratepayers across this province are demanding that you scrap this plan and go back to something that worked since the beginning of the last century.

In Minister Molinari's riding, a ratepayer by the name of Shirley has called us and told us that when she phoned to say she couldn't pay her $700 bill this month, Vaughan Hydro told her not to worry, that they had thousands of calls just like hers. They told them to make weekly instalments if they have to; they're not going to shut them off. I thank Vaughan Hydro for that. But there are thousands of people in Vaughan facing this problem.

In my own riding, a constituent phoned to say that his hydro bill for this month, November, has gone up to $828. When he queried it, because it was only $160 during the heat wave, he was told to pay now or have his hydro cut off.

Your own caucus is falling all over themselves, member after member, to distance themselves from this. When are you going to limit and change and go back to --

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I'm afraid the member's time is up.

Hon John R. Baird (Minister of Energy, minister responsible for francophone affairs): We recognize that there are a lot of people in Ontario -- working families, small business people, farmers and others -- who are concerned about electricity rates; so is their government, so is this minister and so is our Premier. He has asked me to look at the issue with respect to rebates and report back to him in short order on what we can do to express both the concerns people have around the kitchen table with respect to the bills in front of them and with respect to the fear they have for their future -- themselves and their families.

The member opposite is suggesting that we go back to the way it was. The way it was was public power at cost minus $38 billion. I don't think it's responsible, as he and his party would, to borrow $3 billion over five years for hydro or to borrow $50 billion over five years to provide for people in Ontario. I don't think there's social justice in borrowing $50 billion or $3 billion on the backs of our children and our children's children to pay for our life today. That's why we have to move to a better way. We're looking at possible --

The Speaker: The minister's time is up. Supplementary?

Mr Gilles Bisson (Timmins-James Bay): Let me see if I have this straight. You're saying we're better off now; I fail to see how. The reality is that as we go around the province, Ontarian after Ontarian is complaining that they're paying more for hydro now than they did prior to your deregulation scheme.

Just in the city of Timmins on the weekend, I had an opportunity to speak to a number of people. One particular couple, John and Anne, whose bill has gone up by $100 a month, sent me this note after our conversation. They wrote, "My husband and I have been struggling to make ends meet for the last six years due to medical conditions.... Take a lesson from the American experience. Privatization increases costs and reduces services to the paying public."

They go on to make the point that they paid less under a regulated power structure that was publicly owned, and they pay more now. Minister, when are you going to turn the lights on over there and recognize that hydro deregulation is a disaster? Stop it. It's not by doing subsidies or anything else that will fix it. When are you going to stop it?

Hon Mr Baird: The member said it's not by doing subsidies that you're going to stop it. That's exactly what he and his party did in each and every year they were in government. They borrowed $3 billion on the backs of hydro customers; they borrowed $50 billion on the backs of families in the province of Ontario. I acknowledge particularly this member has been consistent in his opposition to privatization.

What do the other members think? Some members say one thing on Bay Street when they're in Toronto and another thing on Main Street when they're back in their ridings. Let's hear one member: "The only way we're going to get more made-in-Ontario electricity is to permit the private sector to come in and build electricity" -- Michael Bryant, Liberal critic for energy. What else have they said? "We know that some areas of the province wouldn't have energy if it wasn't for privatization." Who said that?

My friend the member for Hamilton Mountain, Marie Bountrogianni, said that -- a consistent supporter of privatization on Bay Street, but when she's back in the riding on Main Street, the position changes.

HOSPITAL FUNDING

Mr Dominic Agostino (Hamilton East): My question is to the Minister of Health. On Thursday, the Hamilton Health Sciences corporation announced it may be facing a $30-million deficit. They will be laying off 250 staff. They're going to be closing 69 beds in a specialized complex continuing care unit at Chedoke. They're going to close outpatient physiotherapy and reduce clinical procedures.

Two and a half years ago your government fired the board and CEO of the same institution, because you felt they couldn't control the budget, and you brought in a new CEO and a new board. Two and a half years later we're facing many of those similar challenges. The problem is not the board, which you like to blame. The problem is not the administration, which you like to blame. The problem is your constant and critical underfunding of health care. They need $5.5 million immediately simply to balance their budget, and it's still going to mean a reduction in programs that they've outlined here.

Minister, it's clear you're to blame and your government is to blame. Will you commit today to funding the proper needs of this hospital, the $5.5 million that they asked of your staff on Thursday, to at least be able to balance their budget for this year?

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I'd like to put two facts on the record for this House: first of all, there will be more beds available in Hamilton for complex continuing care patients when all is said and done, and that's what the people of Hamilton really care about.

I must correct the record from the honourable member. When it comes to funding the Hamilton health sciences centre, this government has been there for the people of Hamilton. The percentage increase from 2001-02, just in this hospital alone, is 8.5%. That's a $36-million increase in one year. If you look over the last five years, the Hamilton health sciences complex has received an increase of $138 million. That's a 43% increase. We have been there for the people of Hamilton, and it is time for Hamilton Health Sciences to do its job as well. We have confidence they can do that.

Mr Agostino: Once again, it's someone else's fault. We hear this story over and over: "It's the Hamilton Health Sciences corporation's fault; it's the staff; it's the board; it's the administration." When are you going to take responsibility for your decisions that have impacted on these cuts in Hamilton? The reality is there are 69 beds at the Chedoke continuing care centre. It's a family, it's a home to them. These people are going to be dispersed throughout the community. They don't pay copayment fees now. They will be forced to pay copayment fees when they get put into these other institutions.

The reality is that you've got to stop pointing fingers and blaming this board and this administration and acknowledge it's your underfunding that is causing this problem. They may face up to a $30-million deficit. You don't seem to get it. That's cuts in health care; that's cuts in programs, in services -- 250 staff being laid off. That's the simple truth and reality, Minister. When are you going to step up to the plate, do the right thing and fund this institution properly so it doesn't have to continue making these cuts to health care in Hamilton?

Hon Mr Clement: The fact is that St Peter's is staying open. That's 250 beds right there. The fact is that St Joseph's is building a new 148-bed complex. That is for continuing care as well. Those are the facts.

In the alternative Liberal universe, I suppose a 43% increase in the budget is somehow underfunding or cutbacks, but in the real world we have been there for the people of Hamilton, we have been there for health care in Hamilton and we will continue to be so.

RURAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Mr John O'Toole (Durham): My question today is for the Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing responsible for rural affairs. As you well know, the Ernie Eves government has made rural economic development a top priority. Our government is ensuring that the people who live, work and raise their families in small-town Ontario, like Blackstock, Nestleton, Newtonville and other rural communities, enjoy the same the opportunities for growth and prosperity as their urban neighbours.

Minister, I know you've been doing an exceptional job developing and putting in place strategies and programs that benefit the people of rural Ontario. Can you inform the House what you've been doing and how the success of your ministry's economic development programs have made life better for rural Ontario?

Hon Brian Coburn (Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing): I thank the member from Durham. His tireless efforts in and around Queen's Park certainly represent his constituents in Durham very well.

The task force report on rural economic renewal recommended the development of teams of highly skilled experts who could assess barriers to growth, recommend solutions and work with people to ensure that success and growth happen to their rural economies.

As a result of that, we developed the resource jump teams to achieve this objective. As recently as December 7, 2001, we assigned a group to jump-start tourism in the Land O' Lakes region of eastern Ontario. Thirty-five actions have been identified by that group, a long-term work plan has been done and a variety of new, innovative tourism packages are now being marketed.

We have seen the positive impact in this region as a result of these efforts. Tourism operators in the region are embracing its recommendations enthusiastically.

Mr O'Toole: That's a very thorough answer, Minister. It's clear your heart is still in rural Ontario. I know that for sure. It sounds like part of it is in Northumberland, actually.

This is great news for the people of the Land O' Lakes region and I commend you for the work. Tourism, as you know, is a vital part of not just the Land O' Lakes but the riding of Durham. It's a major economic contributor. Let's understand that. Can you expand on the scope of this project and future projects that might land in Durham?

Hon Mr Coburn: Recently, the member from Northumberland, the Honourable Dr Galt, visited the Land O' Lakes region on my behalf and presented funding in the amount of $400,000, a full 50% of the project's cost, toward jump-starting Land O' Lakes tourism. This OSTAR-RED project is a direct result of the jump team's recommendations, and I'm confident that this exciting private-public sector initiative will indeed succeed.

This $400,000 provincial investment in tourism enables the project partners to work better together, removing barriers to economic development and helping them build a stronger and more diverse tourism industry. We expect this program to have measurable results, raising the international profile of the Land O' Lakes region and enhancing its position as a must-see tourist destination here in Ontario.

DOCTOR SHORTAGE

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a question for the Minister of Health. As you know, we have in Ontario a real crisis --

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Order. I know it's fun lobbying, but the member does need to place a question. I'd appreciate your support. The member for Davenport.

Mr Ruprecht: I have a question for the Minister of Health. As you know, we have a doctor shortage in Ontario. We are indeed in a crisis. A lot of Ontarians are waiting to get an appointment with a doctor and they cannot. Some of our municipalities are totally underserviced.

You know the facts. Right here in Ontario, we need at least 1,000 doctors, while at the same time we have over 1,100 doctors within the greater Toronto area who are foreign-trained professionals. The question is simply this: when will this minister make the announcement all of us are waiting for? As we know, Ontario created a special six-month assessment program this year. All foreign-trained graduates were required to redo parts of their residency program. These are punitive measures. Will this minister now stand up, because he knows --

The Speaker: The member's time is up.

Hon Tony Clement (Minister of Health and Long-Term Care): I thank the honourable member for his question that was offered in all seriousness, and I take it seriously.

As this House knows, Premier Eves and I have been working very hard on a new policy, a new initiative with respect to this area for international medical graduates. I can tell you that we are very excited about the progress we're making. We're still crossing some t's and dotting some i's, but in the fullness of time, this announcement will have every question that I'm sure the honourable member would like to ask answered.

I would assume that the honourable member will support this Ernie Eves government initiative, just as I'm assuming that the opposition members supported us on the northern medical school, a brand new medical school for northern Ontario, just as they hopefully supported us on the new medical education campus at Windsor. Hopefully, they supported us when it came to all of the new initiatives when it comes to --

The Speaker: I'm afraid the minister's time is up.

Mr Ruprecht: Let me remind this minister that his much-lauded new fast-track program -- you know what? -- accepted only 44 of the 709 people who applied. Is that the program you're going to espouse in this Legislature: accepting 44 out of the 709 people who applied? That, obviously, can't be your new policy.

I remind the minister of one other fact. We met, about three years ago, with the OMA and the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons. We indicated to them, with our colleague from Kingston and the Islands -- he made it very clear that we need some action. You have screwed up this policy for the last six years, and now you're coming here to this Legislature and telling us, "Are you going to support this program?" Of course we're going to support this program. But we want you to stand up and say you're accepting more than 44 physicians when over 1,000 community residents are waiting to get some action. Tell us in the House: what are you going to do? When are you going to accept this --

The Speaker: The member's time is up.

Hon Mr Clement: The honourable member is clearly lunging, in some desperate manner, to try to attach himself and his party to the good-news Ernie Eves announcement that is forthcoming. But the people of Ontario can see through that.

In answer to his question, our new initiatives will be the equivalent of one and a half new medical schools for the people of Ontario and for citizens in Ontario to get access to excellent quality training by foreign-trained physicians. They can talk all they want. They're good at talking. We're good at doing.

WORKPLACE SAFETY FOR STUDENTS

Mr Raminder Gill (Bramalea-Gore-Malton-Springdale): Mr Speaker, if you'll allow me, please, my question is for the Minister of Labour. This assembly is well aware of your commitment to workplace health and safety, especially as it relates to young workers. I'm certainly very happy to see so many young people in the visitors' gallery today. I understand that you spoke to students at Hill Park Secondary School in Hamilton about young worker health and safety. Could you please update us on that?

Hon Brad Clark (Minister of Labour): I thank the honourable member for the question. Our government is committed to the health and safety of young workers in the workplace. That's why we're taking the message directly to the students with the Live Safe! Work Smart! presentation. This past Friday at Hill Park Secondary School, I spoke to over 800 students about the importance of health and safety in the workplace.

Interjection.

Hon Mr Clark: I see that the member for Kingston and the Islands is fully supportive of me getting out to the high schools and speaking to them about the need to be safe in the workplace.

The students at Hill Park were very interested in the message I had to share about young worker health and safety, what their responsibilities are and what their rights are. Students were eager to learn how to recognize hazards in the workplace and how to protect themselves on the job. There are no valid reasons for any injury or death to occur in the workplace. That's why the Ernie Eves government is taking the message of workplace safety directly to the students.

Mr Gill: Minister, I am glad to hear that you are taking such an active role in preventing injuries on the job for young workers. I think visiting schools and educating children about health and safety is very important. Minister, please advise us on your future plans about visiting more schools and talking to youth about safe workplaces.

Interjection.

Hon Mr Clark: It would appear that the member for Kingston and the Islands would like me to come to his riding too and speak to the high school students there. In the near future -- actually, next week -- I'll be going to St Mary's Catholic Secondary School in Hamilton to share the same message with the students. The goal of these school tours is very simple: to increase awareness about workplace health and safety, inspire young workers to understand and exercise their rights and responsibilities for workplace safety, promote a Live Safe!

Work Smart! culture for a new generation of workers and encourage a feeling of empowerment among young workers. We need to enhance the skill and knowledge level of our students to equip them with the fundamental skills to protect themselves in the workplace. Finally, we need to increase the level of awareness of the issue among young people, their parents, their teachers and the employers. These are the messages that the Ernie Eves government is bringing directly to the students to ensure that they are safe in the workplace.

HYDRO RATES

Mr David Christopherson (Hamilton West): My question is to the Minister of Energy. All afternoon you have been dancing around the real issues that are affecting real Ontarians. The NDP hydro hotheads have been responding to our call to tell us what's happening out there. From Brampton we're hearing this: "I can see a lot of people going bankrupt over these prices. Should we thank you now or after we file?" From Mississauga: "My brother is on a pension and his bill for two months was $600.

Where is a person supposed to find this kind of money?" From Guelph: "Admit your error and reverse this now." From Waterloo: "I will have to sell my house if this keeps up." From Mount Hope -- and a monthly bill increase of $320: "Do I pay the bill or feed my family?" And from Stoney Creek: "Please stop the deregulation. Help people on fixed incomes stay warm."

Minister, never mind all the macro talk. What are you going to do to help people pay their hydro bills so they'll have heat this summer?

Interjection: He meant winter.

Hon John R. Baird (Minister of Energy, Minister responsible for francophone affairs): I don't want to make light of a serious issue. There's nothing I can do to make the summer not be warm. The member opposite must be listening, though; we did have the warmest summer in 50 years, and I acknowledge that.

I want to tell the member opposite that I also have heard the concerns of working families, of small businesses who are concerned not just about the high hydro bills they have on their kitchen tables today but about the future. The Premier has asked me to look at the whole issue, about a rebate and the whole issue about the challenge that these families are facing. We've indicated that he has asked me to report back in short order and I've committed to do just that.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Supplementary?

Mr Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre): The Conservatives and the Liberals support the deregulation and the privatization of hydro; 80% of Ontarians and the NDP don't. Chuck S., down in Welland: "The whole older generation of people on pension cannot wait for an election. Rebates or no rebates, it's all a sham and we know it." John and Margaret in Grimsby: "All essential services should be run by the government for the betterment of the province and the residents." Ed of Niagara Falls: "You're killing the economy big time. People won't be able to pay their hydro bills any more. That will hurt everyone in the long run."

These folks don't want your crummy rebate. They want restoration of a regulated, publicly owned, publicly controlled, publicly operated, hydro-at-cost hydroelectricity system. Why don't you listen to the 80% of Ontarians? Don't offer them $100 or $150 when they've already been slammed and whacked for what will amount to thousands by the time the winter is over. Tell them you're going to restore regulated, publicly owned hydro here in the province of Ontario.

Hon Mr Baird: The member opposite's own party, his own government didn't bring in public power at cost once when they had five years to do that. They borrowed $3 billion; that's in addition and above and beyond the $50 billion they borrowed out of the consolidated revenue fund, and our children and our children's children will have to pay for that. On the issue of privatization, at least the honourable member has stood in his place and been consistent. What did Dalton McGuinty say? "I am in favour of privatization, both in terms of the transmission and the generation." To clarify that, Michael Bryant said last week, on October 28, "Our position hasn't changed since 1997."

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I am not happy with the answer given me by the Minister of Health. Before he leaves, I'd like him to know that I would request a late show. Perhaps he can come back and expound on his new announcement that we all await.

The Speaker: If I could just remind the member to file the appropriate paperwork with the table, that would be helpful.

PETITIONS

AIR QUALITY

James J. Bradley (St Catharines ): My petition reads as follows:

"To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Eves government's wholly owned Nanticoke generating station is North America's largest dirty coal-fired electricity producing plant and Ontario's largest producer of the chemicals and acid gases which contribute to deadly smog and acid rain; and

"Whereas the Nanticoke plant, which has more than doubled its dangerous emissions under the Harris and Eves government, is now the worst air polluter in all of Canada, spewing out over five million kilograms of toxic chemicals each year, including many cancer-causing chemicals and mercury, a potent and dangerous neurotoxin; and

"Whereas the Ontario Medical Association has stated that 1,900 Ontarians die prematurely each year and we pay $1 billion annually in health-related costs as a result of air pollution; and

"Whereas the Eves government has the opportunity to make a positive move on behalf of the environment by proceeding with the Sir Adam Beck 3 generating facility, which would produce air-pollution-free electricity in this province and would provide an alternative to the constantly increasing demands placed upon the Nanticoke coal facility; and

"Whereas the Beck 3 generating facility would also provide a major boost to the economy of Ontario through investment and employment in the construction and operation of the facility and in addition would offer additional energy for the power grid of the province of Ontario;

"Be it resolved that the Ernie Eves government, as chief shareholder of Ontario Power Generation, order the immediate development and construction of the Sir Adam Beck generating station."

I affix my signature. I'm in complete agreement.

HIGHWAY 69

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): I have another 2,000 names. We now have 28,000 names on this petition. It's to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, dealing with the multi-laning of Highway 69.

"Whereas modern highways are economic lifelines for the north; and

"Whereas the stretch of Highway 69 from Sudbury south to Parry Sound is a treacherous road with a trail of death and destruction; and

"Whereas the carnage on Highway 69 has been staggering; and

"Whereas, in the last three years, 46 people have been killed; and

"Whereas, this year alone, 10 people have needlessly lost their lives on this highway; and

"Whereas the Harris-Eves government has shown gross irresponsibility in not four-laning the stretch of Highway 69 between Sudbury and Parry Sound; and

"Whereas immediate action is needed to prevent more needless loss of life; and

"Whereas it is the responsibility of any government to provide safe roads for its citizens, and the Harris-Eves government has failed to do so;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned" 2,000 people "petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to urge the Harris-Eves government to begin construction immediately and four-lane Highway 69 between Sudbury and Parry Sound so that the carnage on Death Road North will cease."

I of course affix my signature to this petition, and give it to Lauren, our page, to bring to the desk.

POST-SECONDARY

EDUCATION FUNDING

Mrs Lyn McLeod (Thunder Bay-Atikokan): I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas average tuition fees in Ontario are the second-highest in Canada; and

"Whereas average undergraduate tuition fees in Ontario have more than doubled in the past 10 years; and

"Whereas tuition fees for deregulated programs have, in certain cases, doubled and tripled; and

"Whereas Statistics Canada has documented a link between increasing tuition fees and diminishing access to post-secondary education; and

"Whereas four other provincial governments have taken a leadership role by freezing and reducing tuition fees;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

"Freeze tuition fees for all programs at their current levels, and

"Take steps to reduce the tuition fees of all graduate programs, post-diploma programs and professional programs for which tuition fees have been deregulated since 1998."

This is signed by several hundred more students who share this concern. I affix my signature in full agreement with their concerns.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Further petitions? The member for Thunder Bay-Superior North hasn't had one in a while.

Mr Michael Gravelle (Thunder Bay-Superior North): My colleague from Thunder Bay-Atikokan and I were recently at Lakehead University, where thousands of students signed petitions calling for a tuition fee freeze, and certainly I'm here to read some petitions as well. This is a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas average tuition fees in Ontario are the second-highest in Canada; and

"Whereas average undergraduate tuition fees in Ontario have more than doubled in the past 10 years; and

"Whereas tuition fees for deregulated programs have, in certain cases, doubled and tripled; and

"Whereas Statistics Canada has documented a link between increasing tuition fees and diminishing access to post-secondary education; and

"Whereas four other provincial governments have taken a leadership role by freezing and reducing tuition fees;

"Therefore, we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to:

"Freeze tuition fees for all programs at their current levels, and

"Take steps to reduce the tuition fees of all graduate programs, post-diploma programs and professional programs for which tuition fees have been deregulated since 1998."

I want to thank Glendon Tremblay, president of the Lakehead University Student Union, for organizing this petition campaign. I'm very pleased to add my name to the petition.

HYDRO RATES

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): I'll try one in the back row: the member for Sarnia-Lambton.

Ms Caroline Di Cocco (Sarnia-Lambton): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas electricity bills have skyrocketed under the Harris-Eves government's flawed electricity plan; and

"Whereas some consumers have signed higher fixed-rate contracts with retailers, without adequate consumer protection; and

"Whereas the Harris-Eves government has failed to address electricity supply shortages in Ontario, forcing the purchase of American power at a premium prices, driving up prices still further; and

"Whereas the Harris-Eves government appointed a board of directors for Hydro One that has been paying themselves extravagant salaries, compensation packages and severances for senior executives; and

"Whereas Hydro One bought 90 municipal utilities, serving about 240,000 people across Ontario, at premium prices and with borrowed funds. These purchases with borrowed funds have increased Ontario's debt burden; and

"Whereas the Harris-Eves government has added additional fees and taxes to local electricity distribution companies. These charges have also been passed along to consumers;

"Therefore

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, demand that the Harris-Eves government take immediate action to ensure that Ontarians have fair and reasonable prices for the necessary commodity of electricity in Ontario."

I have thousands of signatures. I affix my signature to this petition.

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT

Mr Richard Patten (Ottawa Centre): The petition is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. There are about 300 names on this petition, which reads as follows:

"The unreasonable and inhumane restrictions that the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) is placing on wildlife rehabilitators with respect to the release of orphaned animals will eliminate their ability to help wildlife.

"Whereas wildlife rehabilitators provide an essential public service for many thousands of people seeking help on behalf of orphaned and injured wildlife in Ontario; and ...

"Whereas this will incur significant new costs for local governments with respect to bylaw and public health and safety interventions while creating an emotional and volatile climate because the majority of people in Ontario are simply unwilling to see healthy young animals euthanized," which means killed;

"We, the undersigned, are deeply concerned that the release restrictions imposed by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources will eliminate the provision of responsible wildlife services in our community.

"We petition the government of Ontario to work with wildlife rehabilitators to ensure that progressive, humane and responsible regulations with respect to release criteria for rehabilitated orphaned wildlife are put in place in Ontario."

I affix my signature to this petition as well.

COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET

Mr Tony Ruprecht (Davenport): I have a petition concerning the increases in hydro rates. The petition reads as follows:

"Whereas the government has legislated the opening of the Ontario electricity market as of May 1, 2002, and the price per kilowatt hour for electricity in the province of Ontario has nearly quadrupled since May 1; and

"Whereas Ernie Eves has done a poor job in educating the public as to the ramifications of an open electricity market in the province of Ontario and has done little to punish the unscrupulous sales practices of door-to-door energy retailers; and

"Whereas" the government "appointed the board of directors for Hydro One, who approved exorbitant salaries and compensation packages for Hydro One executives;

"Be it resolved that the Ontario government move immediately to protect our province's electricity consumers by addressing the serious generation problem in Ontario, by punishing unscrupulous electricity retailers and by moving forward with a rebate to offset the increasing costs of electricity in Ontario."

Since I agree, I'm delighted to pass it on to Maureen.

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): The member for Prince Edward-Hastings has been up since the beginning.

Mr Ernie Parsons (Prince Edward-Hastings): I have a petition with over 1,000 names from 280 different cities to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"The unreasonable and inhumane restrictions that the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) is placing on wildlife rehabilitators with respect to the release of orphaned animals will eliminate their ability to help wildlife.

"Whereas wildlife rehabilitators provide an essential public service for many thousands of people seeking help on behalf of orphaned and injured wildlife in Ontario; and

"Whereas the unreasonable release restrictions imposed on wildlife rehabilitators by the OMNR will prevent responsible wildlife rehabilitation, not only compromising wildlife and frustrating the public but forcing it underground and jeopardizing public safety; and

"Whereas this will incur significant new costs for local governments with respect to bylaw and public health and safety interventions while creating an emotional and volatile climate because the majority of people in Ontario are simply unwilling to see healthy young animals euthanized;

"We, the undersigned, are deeply concerned that the release restrictions imposed by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources will eliminate the provision of responsible wildlife services in our community; and

"We petition the government of Ontario to work with wildlife rehabilitators to ensure that progressive, humane and responsible regulations with respect to release criteria for rehabilitated orphaned wildlife are put in place...."

I am pleased to add my name to these thousands of signatures.

POVERTY

Mr Mario Sergio (York West): I have further petitions addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

"Whereas we are seniors and low-income people finding it very hard to live and pay all expenses every day; and

"Whereas with all the increases in our utilities in the last several months, we no longer can afford to have a warm house, or buy enough of a variety of foods, or buy some of the drugs that we desperately need; and

"Whereas we feel helpless, abandoned, and totally neglected by our own government; and

"Whereas, without some sort of assistance from our government, either in terms of subsidy or lowering the cost of utilities," such as hydro or "...gas for heating, we will have to seriously limit the quality and quantity of prescription drugs, or decide to buy food or pay the ever-increasing utility costs;

"We, the undersigned citizens of Ontario, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to help us live in dignity and with compassion and care."

I concur in the content of the petition, and I will affix my signature to it.

LONG-TERM CARE

Mrs Leona Dombrowsky (Hastings-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington): "To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

"Whereas the Eves government has increased the fees paid for by seniors and the most vulnerable living in long-term-care facilities by 15% or $7.02 per diem effective August 1, 2002; and

"Whereas this fee increase will cost seniors and our most vulnerable more than $200 a month; and

"Whereas this increase is 11.1% above the rent increase guidelines for tenants in the province of Ontario; and

"Whereas the increase in the government's own contribution to raise the level of long-term-care services this year is less than $2 per resident per day; and

"Whereas according to the government's own funded study, Ontario ranks last amongst comparable jurisdictions in the amount of time provided to a resident for nursing and personal care; and

"Whereas the long-term-care funding partnership has been based on government accepting the responsibility to fund the care and services that residents need; and

"Whereas government needs to increase long-term-care operating funding by $750 million over the next three years to raise the level of service for Ontario's long-term-care residents to those in Saskatchewan in 1999; and

"Whereas this province has been built by seniors who should be able to live their lives with dignity, respect and in comfort in this province;

"We the undersigned petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

"Demand that Premier Eves reduce his 15% fee increase on seniors and the most vulnerable living in long-term-care facilities and increase provincial government support for nursing and personal care to adequate levels."

I am very happy to sign this petition, and I will be handing it to Hin-Hey, who is the page.

HIGHWAY 69

Mr Rick Bartolucci (Sudbury): This is part of the 28,000-name petition. It comes from Tecklenburgs Restaurant in Sudbury. It is to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and it deals with the multi-laning of Highway 69 from Sudbury to Parry Sound.

"Whereas modern highways are economic lifelines for the north; and

"Whereas the stretch of Highway 69 from Sudbury south to Parry Sound is a ... trail of death and destruction; and

"Whereas, in the last three years 46 people have been killed on that stretch of highway; and

"Whereas" so far this year "10 people have died needlessly on the stretch of highway between Sudbury and Parry Sound; and

"Whereas the carnage on Highway 69 has been staggering; and

"Whereas the Harris-Eves government has shown gross irresponsibility in not four-laning the stretch of Highway 69 between Sudbury and Parry Sound; and

"Whereas immediate action is needed to prevent more needless loss of life; and

"Whereas it is the responsibility of a government to provide safe roads for its citizens, and the Harris-Eves government has failed to do so;

"Therefore,

be it resolved that we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to urge the Eves government to begin construction immediately and four-lane Highway 69 between Sudbury and Parry Sound so that the carnage on Death Road North will cease."

I affix my signature to this petition and of course give it to Maureen and ask her to bring it to the table.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

TIME ALLOCATION /

ATTRIBUTION DE TEMPS

Hon Chris Stockwell (Minister of the Environment, Government House Leader): I move that pursuant to standing order 46 and notwithstanding any other standing order or special order of the House relating to Bill 175,

An Act respecting the cost of water and waste water services, when Bill 175 is next called as a government order, the Speaker shall put every question necessary to dispose of the second reading stage of the bill without further debate or amendment and at such time the bill shall be ordered referred to the standing committee on general government; and

That the vote on second reading may, pursuant to standing order 28(h), be deferred; and

That the standing committee on general government shall be authorized to meet at its next scheduled time for the purpose of consideration of the bill; and

That five days be allotted to hearings and one day allotted to clause-by-clause consideration of the bill; and

That, no later than 4 pm on the day the committee is scheduled for clause-by-clause consideration, those amendments which have not yet been moved shall be deemed to have been moved, and the Chair of the committee shall interrupt the proceedings and shall, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary to dispose of all remaining sections of the bill and any amendments thereto. The committee shall be authorized to meet beyond its normal hour of adjournment until completion of clause-by-clause consideration.

Any division required shall be deferred until all remaining questions have been put and taken in succession with one 20-minute waiting period allowed pursuant to standing order 127(a); and

That the committee shall report the bill to the House not later than the first sessional day that reports from committees may be received following the completion of clause-by-clause consideration. In the event that the committee fails to report the bill on that day, the bill shall be deemed to be passed by the committee and shall be deemed to be reported to and received by the House; and

That upon receiving the report of the standing committee on general government the Speaker shall put the question for adoption of the report forthwith, and at such time the bill shall be ordered for third reading, which order may be called on that same day; and

That when the order for third reading is called, the Speaker shall put every question necessary to dispose of this stage of the bill without further debate or amendment; and

That the vote on third reading may, pursuant to standing order 28(h), be deferred; and

That in the case of any division relating to any proceedings on the bill, the division bell shall be limited to five minutes.

The Speaker (Hon Gary Carr): Mr Stockwell has moved government notice of motion 57. Minister?

Hon Mr Stockwell: Mr Speaker, this is Bill 175, which is the source-to-tap cost recovery bill from the Ministry of the Environment. To set aside six days of committee time to hear this bill, I think it would be important to let the Legislature decide to let the committee decide how they want to manage their time in six days, how they want to travel and how they want to go about doing their business. We couldn't get an agreement from the three parties about exactly how to do that, but I think everyone would agree that six days is a fairly reasonable amount of time to be set aside for Bill 175 to be heard in public hearings at committee.

I know the good work of the general committee. I think it will be up to them and they will do the decision-making, which I think by and large will resolve the issue.

Interjection.

Hon Mr Stockwell: I say to the member opposite, I appreciate the fact of what you're saying. I've canvassed all caucuses on this bill with respect to what it is they'd like to see. Having not heard back from one of them, it was difficult to get a consent motion to determine how we carry forward on this bill. So I did make a decision to go with six committee days in consultation with one of the opposition parties; that seemed to satisfy their concerns. It's the best I can do, considering I can't get consent from all three parties.

Therefore we can't move forward in any kind of collegial agreement about how we manage this bill. I've tried my best to be as generous as possible with respect to committee time on this bill, and I'm interested in hearing from the opposition members.

As I spoke to this bill for the first time in the House, I said to the member for St Catharines that I'm interested in seeing your amendments, I'm interested in seeing the amendments from the opposition, I'm interested in travelling this bill. By turning it over to the committee, I think it's the best possible world that we can have for it.

At this time, I'll be happy to sit down.

The Speaker: Further debate?

Mr Wayne Wettlaufer (Kitchener Centre): I'm pleased to take

part in the debate today on second reading of the Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act. I know there are a number of members here who will remember back 45 or 50 years to the days when we were in elementary school and our memories of safe drinking water and how we heard, back then, about the problems that the people in Europe had insofar as safe drinking water is concerned, and how, through carelessness or lack of regard, those countries no longer had safe drinking water. Well, 45 or 50 years have gone by and of course we in North America are now faced with the same situation.

Safe drinking water, I have to say, is a non-negotiable priority for this government. It is something that the people of Ontario expect will not be compromised. I expect it. I expect that I will be able to drink safe water. I expect that my children will be able to drink safe water. If passed into law, the Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act will set another benchmark and provide an even stronger foundation for safe drinking water. It makes for good planning, it promotes water conservation and is an integral part of this government's clean water strategy. And I do want to emphasize the conservation aspect of water. We should all employ water conservation tactics.

This government is committed to implementing all 121 recommendations from Commissioner O'Connor's report of the Walkerton Inquiry, parts one and two. Our clean water strategy will help to make this commitment. We believe that one of the critical steps toward implementing the recommendations is the government's proposed Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act.

The driving force behind this proposed act is the concept of full-cost accounting and recovery. Our government believes that legislating full-cost accounting and recovery from municipal water and sewage services is one of the best ways to protect public health and our environment. The principles of full-cost accounting and recovery are fundamental to sustainability and are key aspects of Commissioner O'Connor's recommendations in the report of the Walkerton Inquiry, part two.

Full-cost accounting reports will provide us with an accurate picture and a transparent method for identifying all costs, both operational and capital, to ensure that human health is protected when it comes to delivering water and sewage services. The full-cost recovery plans will provide a guide to ensure that sustainable systems are developed and supported.

In his report, Commissioner O'Connor made several references to the need for municipalities to ensure that their water systems are adequately financed. To quote Commissioner O'Connor, "Over the long term, safety depends on stable and adequate financing to maintain the water system's infrastructure and its operational capacity to supply high-quality water consistently."

Commissioner O'Connor also stated his support for the proposed act after it was first introduced to the Legislature as Bill 155. He said, "In my opinion, if passed into law, the act will address many of the important issues concerning the financing of water systems.... The requirements for a full-cost report and cost-recovery plan, as generally expressed in the proposed act, are in my view appropriate."

Through our clean water strategy, of which the Sustainable Water and Sewage Act is a significant part, the Ernie Eves government has pledged to invest more than half a billion dollars over the next two years. I repeat that for emphasis so our critics can be aware of it: this government has pledged to invest more than a half a billion dollars over the next two years in clean, safe drinking water for the people of Ontario. This year alone, the government will provide $245 million, including investments to help municipalities upgrade their water systems to meet our tough new standards and make improvements to their waste water systems.

While we acknowledge that there is still work to be done, this government continues to make significant progress on several other components of its clean water strategy.

We will also deliver on our budget commitment to establish the $50-million Clean Water Legacy Trust and the Clean Water Centre of Excellence in Walkerton. The centre of excellence in Walkerton will provide access to the best scientific knowledge, research and technology, and training in the management and monitoring of our safe drinking water. Again, I want to emphasize that: the centre of excellence will provide access to the best scientific knowledge, research and technology, and training in the management and monitoring of our safe drinking water.

In addition, the government plans to consult with key stakeholders on watershed-based source protection planning issues this fall. Several groundwater studies are already underway to support this planning.

So far, action has been taken on many fronts to help ensure that clean, safe drinking water is delivered to all of the people in Ontario. Our accomplishments include the drinking water protection regulation; the drinking water protection regulation for smaller waterworks, serving designated facilities; the Nutrient Management Act, 2002; and work toward a Safe Drinking Water Act. These examples demonstrate that our commitment is unwavering and the momentum is strong. We fully support Commissioner O'Connor's recommendations and are moving forward to complete their full implementation.

I'd like now to highlight some details of the proposed bill. If passed into law, the new Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act will make it mandatory for municipalities to assess and cost-recover the full amount of water and sewer services. The proposed act will ensure that water and sewer systems generate sufficient revenue to fully recover all their long-term operating and capital costs.

As members are aware, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing first introduced the legislation as Bill 155 last December 2001. In his report, Commissioner O'Connor has stated that the previous bill addressed a number of major financing concerns. The act has been reintroduced to give legal authority to the Ministry of the Environment, as announced by Premier Eves in August of this year. It is also the government's next step in fulfilling Commissioner O'Connor's recommendations.

The concept of full-cost recovery is not a new one. Municipalities are already able to apply full-cost recovery if they wish. In fact, some municipalities have implemented this to some varying degree. But although some municipalities claim to be recovering full costs, the province doesn't know the extent to which they are recovering all of their long-term investment needs. The proposed act will give us the full picture of what it costs municipalities to provide water and waste water services and will require municipalities to do cost accounting according to a regulated standard.

Specific reporting requirements and detailed analyses would include all operating and capital costs; financing costs; renewal, replacement and improvement costs; infrastructure and investments required to maintain and expand the systems; and last, all sources of revenue. Accountants are quite familiar with these types of standards.

The proposed act will also require system owners to develop comprehensive asset management reports. At present, municipalities use different methods in determining water rates. In general, few of these methods include investment needs or what will be needed for repair, rehabilitation and expansion of related infrastructure. As a result, it is difficult to get an accurate estimate of the shortfall.

The reality is that most municipalities do not have a handle on the long-term costs of maintaining their water and sewer systems. That's a fact. This leads to underinvestments in water systems, because much of the infrastructure is buried. The old adage "Out of sight, out of mind" is an unfortunate fact in many cases.

Underpricing of water can lead to deferred maintenance and overconsumption by water users. Deferred maintenance ultimately leads to deteriorating infrastructure and potential risks to public health.

Legislating full-cost accounting and recovery ensures that safe water is a priority municipal service that cannot be traded off with other services; the standard of service is mandatory.

Make no mistake: this is an environment and public health issue. But while the proposed Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act addresses the issue of infrastructure financing and cost recovery, there is also a much broader issue at stake. That issue relates to the overriding principle of municipal accountability.

A new provision in the proposed Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act would require municipalities to report to taxpayers annually on any service delivery improvements and any identified barriers to improving service delivery.

Through better communications, increased knowledge and more consistent financial and full-cost accounting processes, municipalities will be in a stronger position to know exactly where things stand and the true cost of their water and sewer services. This will enable them to take a more proactive view and adopt a more integrated and holistic approach to environmental protection.

Environmental improvement is a continuous journey, and it is a journey that we must travel together. The answers to our environmental challenges cannot come from any one source. Our government recognizes that it must involve consultations and partnerships with municipalities, industries, community organizations and individual Ontarians.

We are open to hearing amendments that make sustainable water and sewer financing work for our partners, but as I said in my opening remarks, our government's commitment to safe drinking water is a non-negotiable priority. There is no way we will allow the amendments to take away from the priority to make safe drinking water a must in this province.

We all need to know the true cost of the water and sewer services that we take for granted. It is the only way we can ensure that these services will be there to support the health and prosperity of future generations -- your children, my children and their children. By working toward common environmental goals, we are able to explore opportunities, take appropriate action and together be at the environmental forefront as we solve our environmental challenges.

I believe, if passed, this bill will become an important legacy of our government. I certainly will look with pride on this as a legacy. I encourage members of this Legislature to support the Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act.

Mr Mario Sergio (York West): I'm delighted to join in the debate on Bill 175.

Just to add to the comments made by the member on the government side, the member from Kitchener Centre, Mr Wettlaufer, we would love to see this going through as speedily as possible. It does not represent the final document we would like to see, and I believe it doesn't represent the final document that Justice O'Connor would like to see because it does not address all the recommendations in his report, but I believe this would be a good first step to move on with addressing safe, clean drinking water in Ontario.

It has already taken a couple of years since Justice O'Connor made his recommendations, and they are good recommendations. But finally something is here, so for my

part I can say that, yes, we should support this bill even though it lacks some very major, important recommendations. But at least it's a first step, and I would say to the government side and to the Premier here, get on with it. Don't delay it. We can work on some of the other details as we go along. We'll see what the government indeed is going to do with respect to some of the recommendations that we as Liberals, and Dalton McGuinty, have been making with respect to safe drinking water.

One very important aspect that the bill is not doing is addressing the problem at source. I believe, and I believe even Justice O'Connor is saying, that controlling the water at source is very important. It's not only important; I don't think we should contemplate water contamination, pollution, at any stage, but at source it's most important.

Let me read what Justice O'Connor has been saying with respect to two of the important aspects of his reports. It says very explicitly, " ... may constitute a significant burden for low-income families and individuals.... Suffice it to say that, since water is an essential need, it would be unacceptable for those who are unable to pay for safe water to go without. The provincial and municipal governments should ensure that this does not occur by whatever means they consider appropriate." This was on page 313 of Justice O'Connor's report, part two.

He was addressing water rates and his concern with respect to affordability. I will try in the next few minutes to address the accountability that Justice O'Connor is speaking of in his report as well.

But there is another passage that I want to read to the House, where Justice O'Connor is practically admonishing the government. Justice O'Connor made a specific warning that the Conservative government's municipal downloading may make it impossible for municipalities to pay for water and sewer infrastructures. Let me say, before I continue with what Justice O'Connor has said, that it's not just a question of approving another piece of legislation without addressing the real problem. The real problem is that a lot of the infrastructure needs a complete overhaul costing millions and millions of dollars.

One cannot accomplish clean, safe drinking water unless the government -- and it's in the report itself again. It needs funding and it needs qualified staff as well.

Let me continue with what Justice O'Connor was saying: "The financing of water systems does not occur in isolation of other pressures on municipal budgets. In light of recent restructuring in the municipal sector, especially the transfer of additional open-ended social service costs (eg, welfare) to municipalities in 1998, there is currently some uncertainty about the ability of municipalities to finance all of the programs they are responsible for, including water services....

I encourage the province to publicly review the program responsibilities and fiscal capability of municipalities in light of recent restructuring to ensure that the financial pressures of municipalities do not crowd out the adequate financing of water systems."

I think this is quite clear. I know the Premier and the government members have the same report which we have, I have read from, showing the concern of Justice O'Connor.

It's not a question of when they knew it or how long this has been in existence; it is a question of doing something about it to make sure that instead of just approving a piece of legislation, the government gets on with the action and says, "Let's do it. We are going to do it."

The bill itself addresses two or three main points. One point is full cost accountability, which I think is fair; another point is full cost recovery. I think these are two very important points. But, as I said just a moment ago, reading from Justice O'Connor's report, who is going to pay? Ultimately, who is going to pay? The government has been totally mute on the issue, solving the problem of who is going to pay for it and how. I'm afraid that ultimately the individual taxpayer is going to get clobbered.

Who is going to be clobbered the most, finally, for whatever action the government is going to take will be the working class people and, most importantly, the seniors who cannot afford any increase in water rates, especially at this time, with what we are going through with hydro rates.

Today I had another family come to my office delivering their hydro bill and asking, "How come the last bill we had was $199 and the new bill is $378?" These are seniors living on a fixed income in a 900-square-foot, two-bedroom pre-war bungalow. I wonder how high the rates w